Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Camera Lens Reviews

• Great images, poor build quality

  
  By A1VLOB7JL0WTOI on 2003-04-30
  Optically, you can't really do that much better than the f/1.8 - strong contrast, good color rendition, and very sharp even when shooting wide open. I bought this lens and it lived on my camera for several months and was the default piece of glass that I reached for when the quality of the shot "really mattered."

  But, honestly, it's built about as solid as a toy prize in a box of Cracker Jack. After a few months of use - use, not abuse - the lens literally came apart, the front barrel separated from the mount. The bad news was that the lens was completely shot - it was in pieces, after all - the good news was that it had been cheap, so my pocketbook was able to stand the cost of replacement.

  I replaced the lens with it's older brother, a used version of the Mark I - much more solid, and which gives equal optical quality even used. It's a shame that the body and housing on new version of this lens is so shamefully cheap, because the glass is very nice. But I can't recommend it, unless you either a) don't do that much shooting, or b) don't mind replacing the lens on a fairly regular basis.

  My suggestion is to either cough up the money for Canon's 50mm f/1.4 - gains you a half a stop and is built to pro-quality standards - or pick up the older version of the f/1.8 on the used market. Either option will likely end up being cheaper in the long run.
  
  

• Perfect Portraits: Canon 50mm f/1.4 vs. f/1.8 Lens Comparison

  
  By A1LXZSZ8FW9UMK on 2005-08-19
  The 50mm/f1.4 and 50mm/f1.8 are the BEST PORTRAIT LENSES that Canon offers. I own a Canon Rebel 2000 and Digital Rebel XT and have used both these lenses for several months. Pictures have been outstanding and my professional customers frequently cite the sharpness, light balance, depth of field, color reproduction, and "bokeh" (intentional blurring of background in portraits) from these lenses. Some people question the usefulness of a 50mm lens on digital SLRs with a 1.6x crop factor (i.e., 50mm lens = 80mm on a dSLR like the Digital Rebel XT)... I can vouch that the range is beautiful and relevant, focusing more closely on key subjects in portraits.
  
  WHAT DO THESE LENSES HAVE IN COMMON? They are both fast (the f1.4 is blazing fast - dSLR can hardly keep up!), details are incredibly sharp (you can see individual hair strands), virtually no chromatic (color) aberration, no dithering or shadows in the corners, focusing is rapid and quiet (thanks to Canon's patented Ultrasonic USM technology) and photo quality parallels even my professional Canon "L" lenses. These fixed aperture lenses also provide superior pictures than telephoto lenses at 50mm because of better glass and aspherical elements.
  
  HOW ARE THESE LENSES DIFFERENT? Having tested both lenses across 1500+ pictures, there are 5 key factors that make the f1.4 superior (justifying the $300+ price tag).
  
  1) FASTER ESPECIALLY IN LOW LIGHT: Extra f-stop makes the f/1.4 better for indoor photos or low light. Great companion to the 480EX flash. I was able to take nearly 40 pics/min with flash and the fastest Sandisk 1GB Ultra II CF card
  
  2) NO CHROMATIC ABERRATION, whereas the f/1.8 has slight yellowing of photos under certain lighting conditions or where edge definition is low
  
  3) FULL AUTO/MANUAL FOCUSING RANGE: f/1.8 requires flipping between auto and manual using a switch, while f/1.4 can be manually "hot" focused/tweaked after auto focusing
  
  4) SUPERIOR BUILD QUALITY: The f/1.8 is plastic and feels cheap, like it might fall apart anytime. The f/1.4 is metal, weighty, and is for the proud lens owner
  
  5) CLEANER "BOKEH" - f/1.4 produces beautiful blurring of background in portraits ("bokeh") while the f/1.8 leaves less clean edges. Canon reviews suggest this is due to the f/1.4 having 8 lens elements vs. 5 elements for the f/1.8
  
  WHICH LENS SHOULD YOU BUY? This is a question of utility vs. value. The f/1.4 costs over $300 while the f/1.8 can be acquired for under $75. The f/1.4 will last forever while the f/1.8 will probably break under normal use in a year. Does this justify the 4x price tag? If you are a budding photographer looking for a "play lens" then the f/1.8 will more than over-deliver. If you are a photo enthusiast who looks for "the perfect shot," you will want the f/1.4 because it surpasses every expectation (and so you're not left wondering, "what if"). If you are a photo professional, you already have the f/1.4 lens among your bag and are not reading this review. :-)
  
  

• Best lens for the money, every EOS owner should have one.

  
  By A1HTB488P5GRCP on 2004-07-30
  5 star for value and picture quality.
  
  With the money of 1.4 version, I can have 4 of this, you only lost half stop of aperture. It is cheapest Canon lens yet produce probably the best result. 80mm focal length on Digital Rebel and 10D means it is the best solution for portrait lens.
  
  Yeah, plastic lens is not as good as metal one. But I really doubt if it will break any time.
  
  for 75 bucks, every EOS owner should have one.
  
  

• Excellent Value

  
  By A30M762P2DUNSB on 2005-12-31
  I've had the 50mm f1.8 for about three months now, so I wanted to put in my two cents worth after a little field use. What originally attracted me to this lens was, obviously, the price. It is very, very inexpensive. This is likely due to the fact that the housing is, unlike its predecessor the Mark I, entirely plastic. That initially put me off, but after seeing some images posted that had been taken with this lens (and after seeing the prices of the f1.4 and the used mark I)I decided that I really had nothing to lose. There are, as with most lenses good and bad elements to this lens. Lets start with the bad.
  
  Keep in mind that if you are shooting a canon DSLR (as I am) this 50mm lens actually behaves as an 80mm lens, so it isn't that terribly wide. The fact that it is functionally 80mm can make framing shots a bit difficult. This is definitely a secondary lens and really isn't that appropriate for a "walking around lens." At least it isn't for me, as I tend to prefer shooting wider angles.
  
  If you have some sort of mishap with your camera, like dropping it, you can likely kiss this lens goodbye. I have fortunately never had to test this, but I imagine that it wouldn't stand up to any sort of impact very well. The flimsiness of the build is very obvious when compared to some of the older canon lenses. MY 35-135mm USM is about 10 years old, and has a metal chassis. These lenses can often stand drops and still operate. This is not so for the 50mm mark II.
  
  Since everything but the glass is bare bones, the autofocus isn't terribly fast. If all you have ever worked with is USM lenses, you will have to be ready to take a little more time focusing. If you have experience with the 18-55mm kit lens, you will find that it is about the same.
  
  All that being said, you are probably wondering why I rated this lens at four stars instead of, say, three. That's because there are a lot of nice features to this lens that far outweigh the bad.
  
  If you have never used a prime lens before (meaning, a "fixed" lens that doesn't zoom) then you are in for a pleasant surprise. It is far more expensive to build a quality zoom than a quality prime, thus decent zooms tend to cost a mint. Also, zooms are only at their best in the middle of their range. The 50mm doesn't move, and so has been optimally designed for its focal length. Shots are sharp at all aperture ranges; shots at medium apertures (f8-f11) will blow your mind. Really. Search the web for some images made with this lens in those ranges and you will buy it. Resistance is futile. Canon may have skimped on the body, but they didn't cut corners on the glass. It is excellent.
  
  The wide aperture (f1.8) is really outstanding as well. I had never really worked with a lens this fast before because, frankly, I hadn't been able to afford to. You dispense with your flash and handhold at levels that you would not have thought possible. And once you get away from flash use during night/lowlight photography, you will see some truly amazing colors that flash typically obliterates.
  
  The fact that it is fixed, and not too wide, forced me to be a little more creative than I normally would when framing shots. When I went to Burma this year, I left my principal lens at my hotel, and didn't realize it until I was far away, so I was forced to use the 50mm as my principal lens. Some of my favorite shots of my whole trip actually come from that day, as I was forced to come to terms with the focal length limitations of the lens.
  
  And finally, there is the price. A lens with glass this good that costs less than a filter setup, or a dozen 8x10 prints? How can you say no? Unless you have the bucks to spend on the f1.4 or the Mark I, this lens belongs in every EOS shooters bag.
  
  

• Sharp, fast, inexpensive

  
  By A3SIFPKLMOY07N on 2005-04-10
  Once upon a time the 50 mm lens was THE standard camera lens and was THE optical benchmark by which manufacturers were judged and compared. Although the basic lens focus has now shifted (at least at the low to mid amateur level) to zooms - you can still benefit from years of research and development that went into designing the 50 mm lens and this here lens may be the best lens, dollar for dollar, that you can ever buy. The question is can you afford not to own this lens?
  
  Years of development have brought us a lens that has a fast aperture of 1.8 - far faster than any consumer zoom lens - and that is sharp as a filed tack. Be forewarned about the sharpness . . . if you are taking pictures of people, this lens is unyielding in its sharpness and may well surprise you and your subjects whose every blemish is captured. The lens has a fabulously shallow depth of field if you want to use the 1.8 aperture to blow out a background. This lens is also ridiculously inexpensive. It is not USM - so it is a little loud. It does not have a moving focus scale. For the money though - this is heaven.
  
  As to the build quality - yes, it is plastic. No, it's not built like the Rock of Gibraltar. If you are going to give this lens extensive use as your everyday lens and you shoot a lot, it may not hold up all that well as one reviewer suggests. However, I've now had this lens and used it fairly regularly (although not as the primary lens) for about 8 years and it is still in great condition. In my mind, spend the $$ on this first before you go and drop $330 on the 50mm 1.4 USM lens and I think you'll find it gets the job done nicely and that the extra $250 on the 1.4 may not be worth the difference in build (major difference), speed (minor difference) and image quality (minor difference).
  
  
• Until the Real Thing Comes Along
  By A3414D1LX5IQGO on 2006-07-02
  Unless you already have a top-quality fixed lens around this length (and Canon makes no L-series in 50mm) I can't understand why you don't own this. It's so cheap. It's fast and sharp.
  
  Eventually, every photographer needs a fixed lens at somewhere around this focal range. I favor zooms for telephoto: it's hard to quickly shuffle on foot between a 70mm and 300mm focal range. I also like zooms for wide angle: you can grab a big landscape or group shot, then a person in close-up, all of which makes a wide-angle zoom a good "walkaround" lens, especially for travelers. The "middle range" between, say, 35mm and 100mm is portrait-range, and a great opportunity for the extra precision and handiness of a prime lens.
  
  Prime lenses usually generate better images at every price point, and the EF 50mm f/1.8 II is no exception. In fact, on a ratio of image quality to price, this lens may be unmatched. Images are sharp and have nice contrast and color. At faster speed, indoor shots without flash are easily possible at reasonable lighting levels. This is crucial for those of us without high-end flashes and who rightly abhor built-in flashes, or flashes in general. The speed (and, again, the clarity) of this lens makes it an obscene bargain. See the peachfuzz on your baby's cheek? Get it; no flash. It's also disposable: you can take greater risks because replacement costs are relatively low.
  
  Buy this, at least as a holdover, until you get L-series glass for your portrait range prime lens.
  
  
• A good deal? Fugedaboudit...
  By A330SN7AK03CJK on 2006-03-20
  For less than $100, you get a great lens.
  
  Other reviewers, on Amazon and many other sites, have complained about the poor build quality... I can't deny that it's made cheaply compared to it's $300 cousin. But most of the people complaining have an unending list of L-glass lenses in their bag.
  
  If you're an amatuer, this lens is more than good. The more expensive version gives you 1/3 stop... a $200 1/3 stop. I've had mine about a year. At f/1.8 I've handheld shots in streetlight and in dim torch-lit restaurants. I cannot imagine a better lens for the money.
  
  And worst case, if the lens breaks, I can buy two more before I've come to the total that I would have put into the f/1.4 cousin.
  
  I highly recommend this lens.
  
  
• A Lens for (Nearly) Everyone
  By A23VGBG17K5NJ3 on 2006-02-27
  When I first made the switchover to SLR photography from point & shoot, I debated over several lenses to accompany the camera's kit lens. The EF 50mm f/1.8 lens is often described as a "must have" lens for new photographers, so I gave it a shot. I must say, I've been very pleased.
  
  Pros:
  
  f/1.8 Aperature:
  This lens is "fast" in that it has a very wide maximum aperature (f/1.8), meaning it lets through more light and can thus take photos with a faster shutter speed than a "slower" lens. A wide aperature also allows for very shallow depth-of-field (and thus a lot of background blur).
  
  Because of the wide aperature, the lens is useful both for lower-light conditions--allowing you to still shoot at fast enough shutter speeds to permit handholding and often without having to add a flash--and for portraiture in well-lighted conditions, in which the background will be blurred.
  
  Cost:
  How many lenses of reasonable quality can you find for under $100?
  
  Cons:
  
  Focal Length on Digital SLRs:
  For the digital SLR user, unless you're using a full-frame camera, the crop factor of the APS-C sized sensor will make this lens more in the range of 80mm and thus a medium telephoto rather than the "normal view" 50mm that many film shooters are expecting--so keep that in mind.
  
  Autofocus:
  The autofocus is not Canon's USM system and is thus a bit slow and noisy, and it requires the use of a small switch to change over to manual focus (no full-time manual focus). Sometimes, the lens seems to "stick" in manual focus after being switched there and then back to auto, requiring a dismounting and remounting of the lens to get it working right again.
  
  Minimum Focusing Length:
  This is not a macro lens and thus cannot focus at extremely close range, although I've successfully used it as such with the "poor man's macro" screw-on magnifying lenses. The loss of quality in doing so has not been a problem for me, anyway.
  
  Build Quality:
  Make no mistake--the lens' cheap price is reflected somewhat in its build quality, although the optics themselves seem to be fairly good. The lens may feel "cheap," and probably would break if dropped, but at the price, one could easily afford to replace it.
  
  Summary:
  
  Overall, I'm quite pleased with this lens and am glad to have purchased it. I tend to use it for pet and human portraiture and have also used it in a pinch for macro photography of flowers and in low-light conditions indoors.
  
  
• Canon's 'Thrifty Fifty' Belongs in Every Camera Bag
  By A1W5SO5D1C13RC on 2006-04-06
  I've been shooting seriously for about a year now and a friend of mine had been trying to get me to use his EF 50 1.8. I shoot quite often in low light conditions and my fastest lens before this purchase was Canon's discontinued EF 28-70 f2.8 L lens. It's a wonderful lens, albeit a bit heavy, but really sharp. Not quite fast enough for stage performance work, but it was the fastest lens in my bag. After borrowing his 50, I was shocked at the plastic housing construction and the tiny focus ring. All of that bias disappeared as soon as I took some test shots and examined them on my PC. This lens is a real jewel producing acceptable bokah and color depth. I find that I use it quite often and the featherweight allows me to keep it in my bag without adding much weight. In most low light situations, the slight light fall off toward the corners is unnoticeable. I highly recommend this lens, as on a price performance ratio, it certainly keeps up with the two L series lenses in my bag. Bravo Canon. You can view how this lens performs on my blog at http://photos.kitaoka.us/knife.htm
  
  
• Excellent photo quality, durability good so far
  By APNJF07PAF02D on 2006-04-27
  Ive been shooting with this lens in my bag for a few months - sometimes it even ends up in my pocket. I havent had a an issue with durability yet. The lens has great clarity at the midrange F stops for its price, especially on a digital with a cropping factor. Any lens can have aberrations at the minimum F stop - yes even the 'L' lenses - it just gets less noticable as the price goes up. the question you should ask is how much am I willing to spend to get that small increase in quality?
  
  I dont think that I will have an issue with the durability as some other reviewers have - mostly because I try not to abuse my camera.
  
  If you are putting this on a Rebel XT then realize that although the Rebel has great features, it is NOT a Pro body with dust and weather seals, an alloy metal outerbody, etc.... and anything that will damage the lens will most likely damage the body too. ALWAYS use a filter - UV, clear or haze to protect the glass, and it will protect the end of the lens barrel too.
  
  If you bought the Rebel XT because you wanted great and sometimes incredible photos at a great price, then buy THIS lens too! If you bought the 5D then you can afford the all metal 50mm 1.4, and send me your hand-me-downs!
  
  Pros: excellent optics for the price, small, light and fast.
  Cons: 50mm is actually a little long for the 1.6 factor - I havent used it as much as I thought I would. Plastic body will not take Pro level abuse - should be fine for average or above average user who sometimes puts stuff back in the camera bag.
  
  Recommended based on value. Even with the 1.6 factor making it longer - I like having it around at this price...
  
  If you have a Rebel XT save the extra money from the 50mm F1.4 and buy the Opteka Battery grip, an extra battery, another CF card and some good filters.
  
  
• Great fast cheap lens.... Cheap is key
  By A4WEZJOIZIV4U on 2005-12-07
  If you would like a list of sites with reviews email
  gumby at dontquotemeonthat dot com
  
  I love this lens it isn't the best build quality and has no zoom but it's "fast" it is worth 80.00 a must have lens i feel.
  
  if your a newbie here's some info
  
  A lens is "fast" when it has a low f-stop... ok so when you have a smaller number the apature is bigger which allows more light through, so this means you can up the shutter speed. and still have enough light reach the sensor.
  
  ok so lets say you have an out door shot if you have say an f/4 lens the shutter speed could be 1/250 of a second and you would get a good exposer. Now this lens can only go f/4
  
  but if you in the same outdoor setting, had an f/2.8 lens you could jump to 1/500 of a second and get the same exposer. and freeze the action mmore effectivly, this i believe is why it's a "fast" lens.
  
  ok have fun and get it done
  
  
• For The Price Everyone Ought To Own One!
  By A242IFN64X6R4E on 2005-08-11
  
  Even though I have the more expensive 50mm 1.4, I can't deny that the 1.8 has the ability to produce high-quality results.
  I have taken as many "satisfying" pictures with this lens as I have with the 1.4! I mean that literally! It has rendered many sharp and colorful pictures!
  
  Also, I know that the build quality has been condemned universally, but for some reason I don't think the build-quality is all "that" bad.
  
  Obviously, for the price, anyone who has a EOS 20D or Rebel XT (both of which I own) or a contemporary Canon 35mm film camera should own one of these!
  
  I love and recommend this lens!
  
  
• Best Value in Photography!
  By A2IC5YNF109DXX on 2005-12-28
  Wow! My theory now is that Canon doesn't put this baby as their kit lens because many people would decide that they DONT NEED ANOTHER ONE! And many of them would be right!
  
  Like others, I bought the Rebel XT and the 28-135 IS lens. The 28-135 is heavy and priced like a gold brick. I guess it does OK, and I do keep it mounted most of the time.
  
  And like others, I stumbled on this lens somehow, read the raving reviews, and for the price figured, "What the heck?"
  
  This lens in tack sharp. It shows the fire in the colors you photograph. The wide aperture means candles can be excellent lights for portraits. Its narrow field is great.
  
  There are pitfalls though. I snapped a pic of my face at arm's length using autofocus a while back and (1) the focus locked on the tip of my nose and my face was already blurring (2) the lens was so sharp that I saw blackheads clearly on my nose tip I can't really see in the mirror (doh!). I've read that dSLR images are slightly soft to aid in later editing. I can only imagine what it would do on a film camera.
  
  Yesterday while camping I slapped this lens on. Unlike the 28-135, this one is light enough that I didnt notice I was carrying a camera everywhere. At night I put the lens on the top of the car pointed at the sky, set the shutter for 15 secs, and hit the button. Much to my amazement, the lens not only showed hundreds of stars that were invisible to my eyes, but it also found a galaxy. That pic is on the customer image section of this page. You can see what I saw, but the smaller size doesnt do the lens justice.
  
  One quirk of Amazon is that this page keeps alternating pictures of lenses. This lens does not have the distance focus scales on the outside of it.
  
  Zoom is nice for many things. But where zoom isnt necessary, performance is very, very nice. Performance at $70 is almost too good to be true.
  
  Let me close by repeating what has been said elsewhere and will continue to be said here....IF YOU OWN A SLR, STOP NOW AND GET THIS LENS!
  
  UPDATE 12/06 I have owned this lens for about a year now. Over that time I have immersed myself in photography, workshops, books, tests, etc. I have since upgraded to the 30D and a couple of L lenses, and now have a portfolio strong enough that I am now getting dollar signs thrown at me that I didnt even see coming. I say all this to give you some perspective on what I will write afterward.
  
  Now that Ive really learned the difference, I can agree with others that it is a tad soft wide open, but that is to be expected. I read a lens test recently that put the 1.8 against Canons heavweight L glass, and, not surprisingly, the L beat out the $70 plastic wonder in most categories. What might surprise you, however, is that when the lens was tested at F 8 it BEAT THE L GLASS in sharpness! As one that has felt the pain of trading large sums of money for L glass, that still amazes me.
  
  My 28-135 has since joined my kit lens in the garage. The 1.8 is still in my case with my newer 30D.
  
  With some experience under my belt I now would make the following recommendation. Right now, as you read this, you may have an idea if you've been bitten by the photog bug. You may know that this beast is going to morph into something more than a simple pasttime. If you look inside the depths of your aspirations and you know that you are going to be a serious amateur, bite the bullet and get the 50mm 1.4. Trust me on this one. Eventually you'll end up getting it anyway, so just apply the $70 to the 1.4 now.
  
  If you're just exploring different areas of SLR photography, you cant go wrong with this lens. Case in point- as of this writing the baby in pink in the customer images section of this lens is one of the top-ten rated images of all pics uploaded on Amazon! This lens will allow you to dazzle friends and relatives used to snapshots from point & shoots. It will be the start of what you upgraded to a DSLR for in the first place. For you, the 1.8 is still, by far, the best value in photography!
  
  
  
• takes some great photos, can't beat the price
  By A1V5B0JGFSOXD4 on 2006-02-16
  I bought it because it's fast (F/1.8) and cheap. It turns out it's also very simple to use because you can't even fiddle with the zoom since it has no zoom!
  
  So armed with this lens and an indoor performance, I took a bunch of pictures, one-handed, on my Digital Rebel XT, and I ended up with some of the nicest pictures (indoor or out) that I have ever taken:
  
  http://payne-family.org/ISTP%20CNY%20Performance%202006/
  
  Most of the pictures are very sharp, none of the pictures were taken with a flash.
  
  The only problem is 50mm is really 80mm if you use a digital SLR with the typical 1.6 multiplication factor. So it's no good for some situations. I think I will have to get another more wide-angle lens that's also nice and quick to cover all the bases.
  
  Remember - a fixed focal length lens will tend to be very sharp and much quicker because it's a simpler lens. Boy was I blown away by this one.
  
  
• Fabulous Lens for the money
  By A16MLF6AHD5FXB on 2006-03-25
  I LOVE THIS LENS. It is hands down the best value you can get. I am amazed at how sharp the images turn out with this, much sharper than the 18-55 Kit lens and for me was way better than the 28-105 3.5-4.5 USM II that I bought, and returned.
  
  Colors are great, the 1.8 for indoor photography is awesome and the higher you set the aperture the better it gets. I love this lens. If you spent your $1000+ on a Canon Digital SLR you'd be nuts to not spend another $70 and pick this up. Going out and shooting pictures is a blast, but the icing on the cake is when you get home and they turned out how you imagined. This lens will do that for you. I shoot with a 20D.
  
  
• Incredible value for the money
  By A2F0Z8Y0QN29UF on 2005-09-22
  This is an incredibly sharp lens. It's a little soft at 1.8, but anything above that is excellent. Shooting indoor shots without a flash is a joy. Biggest problems-slow focus and a 5 blade aperture. The slow focus can be a problem, since the huge aperture and generally short distance to the subject makes for a very small focal plane-inches in some cases. The five blade aperture means highlights and bokeh have a distinct pentagonal shape. Still, this is the lens that lives on my camera (Digital Rebel XT).
  
  
• Great glass, junk construction
  By A3K4459O30UUAZ on 2006-11-27
  I use mostly canon L-series glass. I was thrilled with the performance of this lens-- super sharp-- but dismayed when the lens rolled off my pelican case and fell 7 inches *onto carpet* and broke clean in two. Ridiculous. I've handled a earlier version (with a metal) mount that felt far more robust.
  
  
• Great inexpensive portrait lens, but must realize focal length limitation on 1.6 crop cameras
  By A3MWDWYZFV3DCL on 2007-02-01
  This review is lengthy, detailed, and honest, but it reflects my personal experience which will likely differ greatly from your own, so keep that in mind. This review is geared towards budget minded people (I am a university student after all) with 1.6x crop-sensor cameras, e.g. Rebel, XT, 20D, 30D, etc. who probably started out with the kit lens and now have outgrown it.
  
  This is an optically excellent lens at a truly bargain price. Particularly if you are going to this straight from the kit lens, you will be amazed and even shocked at the quality of the images this lens can produce compared to the kit lens.
  
  Low-light performance is excellent, with the large aperture (still incredibly sharp wide open) allowing wonderful low light flash-free photography which will greatly impress you, your friends, and your family after you photograph people candidly at your next gathering.
  
  This brings me to the focal length limitation. For what I just described, candid low-light photography at a party or other gathering, as well as candid shots of children and pets, this lens excels because on a 1.6 crop camera (such as the Digital Rebel series, which I imagine most people who buy this lens have) this equals approximately an 85mm lens in 35mm film camera terms. This is a classic portrait focal length, and so naturally it is perfect for candid portraits (as well as posed ones, of course) because it lets you get pretty close to people without sticking the camera in their face, as well as providing pleasing out of focus backgrounds with very sharp subjects. Canon also makes an 85mm f/1.8 lens which people who own the more expensive full-frame cameras love for the same reasons those of us with the 1.6 cameras love this one, because the focal length and large aperture are perfect for the sort of photography I've just described.
  
  It's not that it has no use besides that, though; I've taken many landscape and cityscape photos with this lens that are wonderful. But usually, I feel very closed in by the long focal length. If you're a long distance away from your subject, this lens can often be great for landscape and nature photography, but eventually you'll be longing for a wider field of view and will at least be tempted to go back to the kit lens for many shots, and for some you will absolutely need it.
  
  And this is its biggest problem, which is the flip side of this being a great lens for low-light social gatherings - even if you only use this lens for low light situations, you will feel like you need a wider field of view at least half of the time. To get a group shot of four or five people with this lens in a small house, I literally had to shoot from across the next room through the door, and that still wasn't quite wide enough. My only other option was to use the kit lens, which with its f/3.5 maximum at the widest focal length is just not usable for most low-light situations without a tripod or flash, so I had no choice.
  
  To reiterate, it is very likely that if you aren't already spending a lot of money on your camera and lens collection, you will really feel the limitation of not having a wide enough field of view for a lot of your photography. Depending on your style and what you mainly shoot, you could easily get very frustrated with this lens despite its strengths.
  
  The other thing that is likely if you're upgrading to this from the kit lens is that you will get addicted to the insane increase in picture quality and low-light usability and will not ever want to use the kit lens again, which means you'll need another higher quality lens that gives you a wider field of view. I used this lens more or less exclusively for about three months, became frustrated at not having a wider field of view, and ended up buying the $350 Sigma 30mm f/1.4 for its "normal" ~50mm equivalent on my 1.6 crop camera, and for its large aperture. That lens is great, by the way, and I wholly recommend it instead of this 50mm lens if you've got the money. You do lose the advantages of the 50mm's long reach for portrait situations, but in general you can make up for this by getting closer to the subject, which admittedly is not always possible. Solution? Get both ;)
  
  Ultimate advice? If you've only got the kit lens and maybe a cheap telephoto zoom and you really don't want to or simply can't spend money on more expensive lenses in the near future, don't get this lens yet. Save your money up for a more versatile (and still optically excellent) lens in the $300-400 range, namely the "standard digital zooms" offered by Sigma, Tamron, and Tokina in that price range. I am currently saving up for one of these (probably the Sigma 17-70, the least expensive of them, since the advantages of the others are covered by the 30mm and 50mm lenses).
  
  If you crave the low-light performance (which was what attracted me), and you really don't feel like you can spend $300 or more for something like the Sigma 30mm f/1.4, then go for it, but don't say I didn't warn you. You'll be craving more expensive lenses in no time.
  
  Another disadvantage that you won't notice too much unless/until you have more expensive lenses is the build quality. In terms of durability I'd say this lens is great and it will hold up to normal abuse, but it definitely feels like a plastic toy, the manual focus ring is only marginally better than the one on the kit lens (which is a joke), and if you care about this sort of thing, it looks a little awkward on the camera (I have the Rebel XT). It is the same size as the 50mm lens for my 1978 Canon A1, but since the body styling on these new cameras is so different from the classic camera body style this size and shape looks a little silly. It's purely a cosmetic concern, but don't be surprised if you feel a little self-conscious about using it in public (this won't stop you from using it, of course, because you'll know that the silly look of the lens has no bearing on the outstanding results you get).
  
  Finally, the autofocus motor is a little noisy, but if you're used to the kit lens you won't mind it because it's only slightly louder than that (just wait until you're spoiled by the silent and super fast ultrasonic motors on the more expensive lenses, though...) The focus accuracy is excellent, even in low light, but there's no avoiding that it will occasionally have to hunt for focus in very low light and while this is extremely annoying, there's really not much you can do about it even with the more expensive lenses and cameras.
  
  Overall - it is hard not to recommend this lens, but only if you get it knowing its limitations ahead of time and you are ok with it, and accept that it will probably make you want more expensive lenses to go along with it.
  
  Again - for the things it is best for (portraits and candids, kids, etc., though of course you can do a lot of creative things with it), you can't do better than this lens, especially on a budget (but, this lens compares extremely well with the much more expensive similar lenses!) What it absolutely is not, though, is a "walk-around", general all-purpose lens that you can leave on your camera most of the time like in the film days when most people just had the 50mm f/1.8 lens that came with their camera and never took it off. The Sigma 30mm f/1.4 I mentioned fits that bill perfectly, if that's what you're looking for.
  
  
• More than I bargained for. Seriously.
  By A3U7HS3TEX6B90 on 2007-11-05
  Lenses are funny things. We'll spend hundreds, sometimes thousands of dollars for a lens. Bokeh, the widest possible aperture, reputed clarity of the glass - those things that affect the picture - have to be measured against the impact to our wallets. We'll cough up for AF, IS, even cool stuff like catadioptrics or telephotos so long we look like anteaters carrying them around. Sometimes it gets to the point where we think we *have* to spend a lot of money, lenses are so cool.
  
  And yes, I've spent the big money for lenses; I don't like doing it, but sometimes, it seems like to get the features you want, you just have to.
  
  This lens taught me something. Maybe you *don't* have to. I'll tell you why.
  
  I bought a new camera. An EOS 40D. A great camera for me, does the things I like, and does them well. My first Canon, though, I had no lenses. So I thought long and hard about what lens to get first. I ended up buying a macro lens, about $500 out of pocket by the time it was shipped to me. A great lens, and you bet I got some great macro shots. But it was a *macro* lens, and you know it was only a few days before I was pining to shoot some "regular" images. I looked at all manner of lenses, and the choices were just too much. I ended up unable to decide on anything.
  
  So... then I saw this. $73? What the heck, let me get this and I'll have something to play with until I can decide among the many others that were seriously vying for my attention.
  
  And THEN... then I received the lens. Now I don't feel what it was that attracted me to the more expensive lenses. That's how good this baby is. It's true, it doesn't have as many blades as a higher end lens and so your background blur - bokeh - is a little bit polygonal instead of nice round blurs; but frankly, I consider that to be nit picking in the extreme. Look at the beautiful samples people have uploaded here, actual results, and you can see that it will do a great job of isolating foreground objects. The bokeh is fine unless you're in some kind of pro competition or you are so finicky about your photos you sit in front of your prints all night, twisting your hands like someone who's had too much coffee.
  
  Plus, this thing is really, really sharp. Give it the best chance - lots of light, tripod mount, fast shutter speed - and you'll be rewarded with pixel level detail, or at least as much as the optical low pass filter in your camera lets through to your sensor if you're shooting digital. I was *astonished* at the clarity, the EOS 40D's 10 mp sensor would surely find any glass problems, but... nothing. It makes perfect pictures. The AF works precisely, so that using center point only on my 40D, I was able to resolve exact details on many subjects using nothing but the AF. This is *not* typical behavior for an inexpensive lens.
  
  Speed: It's pretty quick, all right, especially if you're willing to sacrifice some depth of field. Canon's got an f/1.2 in the L series for about 20 times the price if this really isn't quick enough. Though I suspect that most of you, like me, look at lenses priced well above $1000 and quickly find other things we want to buy instead. Like a whole new camera! With this lens, you can literally shoot decent space photos on a high-megapixel camera just by setting the lens to wide open aperture, laying your camera on its back, and using a good fast ISO setting. There's a good example of this in the gallery. I tried it for myself, and it worked great (by the way, see if you can find a moment to rate that photo up... it's a terrific example of what the lens can do!) Frankly, that's something only a really fast lens can pull off, at least, in my experience - because if you keep the shutter open too long, you'll have star trails instead of points.
  
  Features: It's a basic lens. It just works. Which is just what we want, of course. But that's not to say it doesn't bring some features to the table.
  
  It's good from about one and a half feet out to infinity; it's autofocus, but you can't touch the focus ring while it is driving it - it isn't a full time manual focus design. There's a switch for manual / AF mode in the usual place. One thing I appreciated was the red alignment dot being a physical nub instead of just being silk-screened on (or inside!) the lens - I change lenses around often, and I really eyeball those dots a lot to save wear and tear on the camera. You get both the lens covers you need, one for the business end and one for the camera end (for when it isn't mounted on the camera.) It uses 52 mm filters, and the threading is well machined, I had no trouble at all attaching and removing filters. It takes the ES-62 hood, which is not included. The lens system itself is five groups of six elements for f/1.8 - they didn't just throw it together.
  
  Now, as to build. Yes, the barrel is plastic. Plastic is not a dirty word, though, really - it can be quite durable, with the right plastic in the right application.
  
  The lens feels fine, not "cheap" at all. I mean this in the sense that the lens fits the camera well, and there are no funny noises or other warning signs of less than sufficient design.
  
  It *is* plastic, and one thing about that is that the lens is very light weight for what it does, and that makes longer shooting sessions more pleasant. I can tell you that my physically much larger macro lens tires me out in just a few minutes; this lens doesn't do that, it's almost like it weighs nothing - it's only 4.6 ounces, all of it physically close to the camera so it doesn't exert much leverage on your wrists.
  
  Here's an issue you can, and should, sink your teeth into: When focusing, the lens physically extends, and that is a difference between a more expensive lens and this one that can really matter. This is because it affects how you can use the lens. It is something you should, no, you *must*, keep in mind when using this lens. I'll explain.
  
  Actually, I would speculate that of the people who managed to destroy this lens in short order, I bet at least some of them physically had the business end of the lens resting on something, or were holding onto the focusing ring when the AF system tried to drive the lens to a new physical configuration, and poof - the gear train, or the motor, or both, went nipples north.
  
  You just can't do that - not with *any* lens that extends physically. Don't touch, or rest, the focus ring on this lens in AF mode, EVER! If you watch out for that one issue when you use it, just keep the lens free in the air and your fingers off the ring, I bet the lens will last years.
  
  Why so confident? Simple: Based on the incredible track record Canon has for its camera and lens product lines, I think we can very safely say that Canon knows precisely what they are doing, generally speaking. They're not fools, I think we can all agree.
  
  With that in mind, simply consider that Canon has placed a full one year warranty on the lens. Frankly, I don't believe they would do that if it was truly going to fall apart in a few months when used properly, as some of the less positive reviews here have said. Treat it right, it'll almost certainly treat you right. This is *Canon*, people, not the Wang Chung Junque Manufacturing Co. operating out of a cave somewhere.
  
  In the end, even if mine did break, I'd replace it in a heartbeat. It is a truly great lens for the money. Highly recommended.
  
  
  *** I've added an image to the image gallery that is a CLIP of a small portion of an image shot of the night sky. In it, you can clearly see the great nebula in Andromeda. I've identified the individual stars for you, and you can see the entire image by checking my flickr account (fyngyrz). When I saw what I had captured with this modestly priced lens, my jaw nearly hit the floor. Is this lens sharp? Unbelievably so, and here's stone proof of it.
  
  
  
• Best lens for the money.
  By AW3PPNT2SYLQW on 2006-04-24
  With this lens it is well known that you'll either get a great sharp copy or a problem copy that is either soft, back focuses or front focuses. Most people get a good copy but this lens seems to have a higher bad rate than others.
  Anyways, just return it until you get a good one. Once you do get a good one this lens is never coming off your camera. Is has perfect sharpness, even at 1.8. Its a tad slow to focus and is noisy. It feels like a plastic toy from a snack box but dang, it has awesome glass and thats what matters.
  You're not going to find a lens under $400 that can perform nearly as well as this one does. Its extremely sharp that your eyes will bleed, it has perfect contrast and color. No true canon fan would be without this lens.
  Due to its awesome 1.8 fstop its great for low light. It can keep your shutter speeds nice and fast to stop motion in very low light. I don't know what I'd do without this lens.
  
  
• Very sharp lens
  By A1KMA4IW87NMNT on 2006-05-11
  I got my new EF 50mm 1.8 II yesterday. Some people have reported that this is a cheap plastic lens and the quality was not any good. I paid $75 for it off Amazon.com (delivered). Although it is made of plastic, I find that it will probably not "fall apart in your hands" as some others have suggested. My only issue with this lens is that the Manual / AF switch was a bit difficult to slide. The lens seems to take very clear pictures and the boken seems to be very good.
  
  
• Excellent value for the money
  By A152R8B7IAGRAT on 2006-06-08
  If it's price tag was higher - I wouldn't give it 5 stars due to the poor construction and AF performance. It's just plasticky and misses focus in low light. Not a good match for users who put their dSLRs and lens through rough use, but for a more relaxed user of Rebel or 20d/30d this is a nice pick.
  
  If you look past the build quality (and you should) this little lens packs a punch. I got this since I don't like to use flash and like to shoot in low-light - decided to try a prime and this was an obvious pick.
  
  I've got a good copy - sharp even wide open at 1.8, providing you get the focus correct, since DOF is very shallow and the lens does have some focus field curvature.
  
  Users who mention softness wide open probably use the "focus-recompose" technique , which is not a good idea with such a large aperture since your focal plane will shift. You should always frame the shot with the correct AF point.
  
  Wide open it has less contrast, but that tends to work well for portraits. At f/8, it's remarkable.
  
  All in all, I'm happy with it.
  
  
  
  
• What a great lens, especially for the price, super Sharp at F2.5!
  By AU5U16YWAIYZP on 2007-08-16
  Pros:
  
  Small Size
  Low Price
  Light Weight
  Nice Bokeh
  Ok at F/1.8
  Better at F/2.2 F/2.5 F/2.8
  Sharp as most lens at F3.2 and still blurs the background well
  Natural light photography sharper at F1.8 then the Kit lens at any setting
  Great portrait lens on cropped 1.6 cameras like the Rebel Xti
  
  Cons:
  
  Slow Focus
  Poor low light auto focus
  Poor motion tracking auto focus
  Cheap plastic construction
  Flash performance much worse then the 18-55 Kit lens
  No Lens Hood
  
  Actual use and thoughts:
  
  I bought this lens because I wanted to take sharper clearer photos then the kit lens until I can afford another L lens and because I wanted to shoot using natural light inside churches while photographing wedding portraits.
  
  Is it sharper then the Kit 18-55 lens? In natural light shots you bet!!
  I did some tripod mounted tests at different F stops and it's sharper at F1.8 then the kit lens is at any setting at any focal length. However!! You do not want to use flash with this lens. I know I know you buy this lens to take natural light photography. But I flipped up the flash on my Rebel Xti to add light when my daughter wanted the lights out to blow out the candles on her birthday cake. The results where terrible!! There was glare on all reflective materials and highlight over exposure. Plus when trying to focus on moving subjects in candle light you had better be ready to switch to manual focus.
  
  I found out that this lens is an old design and does not support E-TTL II flash photography and does not have the coatings the newer designed for digital photography anti-glare coatings or distance flash distance measurement system. What does all that mean for the person who bought this for natural light photography? Nothing, it doesn't detract at all just know that the flash photography will not be anywhere near as good as that of the kit lens or any of the newer lens.
  
  Now, on to the good, this lens is great at natural light portrait photography on the cropped 1.6 Digital Rebel Body!!! On this camera it's now a 80mm lens, perfect for Portrait, with very nice Bokeh and good contrast. Great for low light when you have to get a shot like this with no flash.
  
  On the other hand, it's not much good for anything else. This field of view is too narrow with a cropped sensor for getting the entire scene and if you want their entire body you really have to back up. It's also too narrow for scenic shots where you want people in the foreground and great wide scenic shots of places like the Grand Canyon where you would need something like 17 - 24mm. It's also too short to be a telephoto lens. Why do I mention this? Because you will surly want a good zoom lens in addition to this lens Do NOT buy this as your only lens. Buy it as a backup to a good zoom for when you need low light great Portrait or both. Also know that you will be switching between the two during a shoot to get good portrait and wider angle shots. In fact if you find yourself in a situation where you need to be versatile do NOT put this lens on your camera, it is not very versatile. What do I mean by versatile? Situations where you need to change angle of view or switch from natural to flash photography quickly. Or shots where there is a lot of movement causing you to refocus your shot quickly.
  
  Bottom Line: If you are cash strapped and want a great natural light Portrait lens to go with your Canon Digital Rebel then go with this lens. If you have a little more money then you should go for the F/1.4 50mm lens which focuses faster has better build quality etc. and does the same job just better.
  
  If you can only afford just one do it all lens in this price range do NOT get this lens, get the 18-55mm kit lens It's not as sharp in natural light but is all around a much more versatile lens and produces much better flash photos.
  
  If you can afford $200 buy this 50mm F/1.8 lens and the 18-55 kit lens and use them together as a team.
  
  In closing over all I am pleased with the F/1.8 50MM lens when using it as a natural light portrait lens, but it's not as versatile as I thought it would be and I wonder if I should have saved up my money and waited to get the 50MM F/1.4 lens which is a much better lens over all even if it does cost more then 3 time as much. Now however I am hearing that the F/1.4 is having reliability problems with the auto focus and manual focus. When shooting a wedding I can not use a lens I can not rely on. I can rely on the F/1.8 to see me through and even afford a backup just in case I drop it again.
  
  3-28-2008 Update
  
  I now own the expensive and heavy Canon 85mm F/1.2 L II and Canon 135mm F/2 L lens for portraits and of course they blow this poor 50mm away. But I still have a soft spot in my heart for this lens and for those on a budget or for those who are taking this lens into areas where you would not want to take an expensive lens I still heartily recommend the Canon 50mm F/1.8 II lens for the price it takes fantastic photos!
  
  Filter Update 3/28/2008
  
  After much searching I found the perfect filter. The Hoya Multi Coat HMC Pro1 Protection filter is not supposed to filter the shot just protect the front lens element. I was very worried that it would affect the shot after having tried some other premium filters like the B+W UV which caused the photos to be softer and duller. However, after some tests I found that in some weird way the Hoya Multi Coat HMC Pro1 actually makes the photos seem to have just a little more contrast and be a little sharper then without. I thought I had gotten the test shots backwards and had to retest with a little sign in the photo saying with and without filter in place just to make sure. Really amazing!!! I'm sold!
  
  Lens I currently own:
  Canon EF-S 17-55 F/2.8 IS Ultra sharp, great colors, great low light, poor zoom action
  Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 Rebel XTi Kit lens Muddy, slow, pile of junk
  Canon EF 17-40mm f/4 L Fantastic colors, pretty sharp, ultra smooth zoom action, light weight
  Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L Fantastic colors and contrast, sharp, zoom a little stiff at first, heavy!
  Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II Good budget portrait lens, light weight, disposable, sharp from F/2.5
  Canon EF 85mm F/1.2 L II The best portrait lens for female and children clients, buttery smooth Bokeh, heavy and expensive it shares sharpness with 135mm
  Canon EF 135mm F/2.0 L The best portrait lens for males and tied with Canon 85mm F 1/.2 for sharpest lens I own, buttery smooth Bokeh
  Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L fantastic colors, sharp for a zoom, very versatile ego boosting and attention getting and heavy!
  
  7-4-2008 Update:
  
  My love of this lens continues. Not long ago I took another short motorcycle ride with some friends and didn't want to risk my more expensive lens and camera. So, I took my Canon Rebel XTi and 50mm F/1.8 lens. I had forgotten just how great this little lens is. You can take nice portraits with decent bokeh (some shots it's really good, but points of light show the 5 aperture blades producing 5 sided points of light). You can vary the shot with F/1.8 giving you a creamy white super soft effect for the women and F/2.5 giving you less Bokeh but the sharpness you need for detail shots and male portraits. The big plus for me as well is the weight. This is a combo you can carry all day long without killing your back and arms.
  
  At this low price how can you NOT own this lens?
  
  My next lens purchase I'm saving for right now:
  Canon EF 300mm F/2.8 IS L the finest lens ever made by Canon
  
  
• Fast consumer prime, cheap build quality not USM motor
  By A2BFQZMGDGXC2M on 2005-06-30
  I needed a fast prime to shoot available light in a gym using my digital rebel in 1600iso mode. The lens is really quite good, even wide open, but since it's not a USM ring motor, you do have to excercise a little more care when you take it on and off the camera or screw filters onto it.
  
  The type of motor in this lens is fragile and sensitive to too much torque being put on the focus ring (puts stress on the motor parts). Forums advise you to switch to manual focus when putting the lens on or off the camera or installing filters or hoods to avoid moving that front focus ring too much while doing so.
  
  The build of this lens is EL CHEAPO plastic. There is no full time manual focus with this lens. I find that when shooting vertically that the lens sometimes has a hard time auto focusing (I belive the term is backfocusing), when shooting heavy action it's almost better to leave it in manual mode. I'm sure this was put out there for the photo schools to provide a cheap lens for their students--don't get me wrong it's a good lens for the price but don't expect it to stand up to a lot of heavy use.
  
  
• A lens that is a must have for budget beginners.....
  By A3HE5I2VGHMNP8 on 2005-09-16
  ...and even for the pro-amateurs.
  
  I personally just started into the DSLR game with my Rebel XT (body only) and purchased two lenses, the Canon 28-135mm IS USM and the 50mm f/1.8 II.
  
  While the 28-135 is decent, that's a completely different story.
  
  As for the 50mm f/1.8, it's a terrific lense in all aspects. Where else can you get a VERY inexpensive, sharp, and relatively fast lense that you can shoot in low light conditions. I mean there simply are no other lenses that touch it in it's price point. Being that I had already dumped quite a bit of money to start this hobby. What is another $70 bucks compared to all those other high dollar lenses.
  
  While it can be soft wide open, this lense really shines at around f/8.0 rivaling lenses costing 10x the price. And the bokeh (background blur) that it produces is quite nice. It's great for portraits and candids but just make sure that you keep it relatively bright or else you'll find yourself switching to manual focus. While it can't zoom, that is a good thing as primes (single focal length) lenses always yield sharper images and it's a cheap experiment into the world of primes (trust me I've considerd going straight primes after viewing images from this lense compared to my 28-135mm)
  
  Overall it's a great lense for the money especially for beginners such as myself. Yes it may not have the greatest body or mount but this a great learning tool and stepping stone into more advanced and expensive (if you even need to go that way) lenses.
  
  Give it a try as it is definitely an inexpensive diamond in the rough.
  
  
• Just buy it. $70 and you'll love it.
  By A1RMX8OHTVW0MJ on 2006-03-10
  What can I say about this lens? Well......Let me say this. Ever since I bought this lens, this is the only lens I use for the portrait shots.
  
  So easy to use. The only thing you have to do is to change the aperture per number of people. Remember, it's pretty much wide open and at 50mm fix focal length, so, when you shoot more than two people, even if they stand back to back, one of them will be much blurry. Here's what my experience told me:
  
  1.8: 1 person
  2.0: 2 people side by side
  2.5: 2 people back to back
  2.8: 3-5 people
  
  You don't really have to buy the 50mm f/1.4. This lens will do the same job. The only thing you won't like is the lack of USM and makes this lens a bit noisy. Other than this, this is perfect.
  
  
  
  
• A "gateway" lens...
  By A17TV0AAUHKXUX on 2006-05-05
  Pros: Absolutely no better way to get started with prime lenses short of finding a used EF 50mm f/1.4; it's fast, it's light, and it'll teach you about depth of field and bokeh. It'll make you focus with your feet, and getting closer WILL improve your images. If you get a good one--and I received a good one first time out--the autofocus is fast and locks in tight. And if something goes horribly wrong (slip, crash, tinkle), you can buy a new one with very little heartburn.
  
  Cons: With the sensor factor, it's effectively an 80mm lens, so it's not really "normal," it's made of plastic, it can be soft when it's wide open (the focal plane is vanishingly small at f/1.8), and it seems to be subject to some quality control issues in manufacturing. If you have big, meaty fingers, it can be difficult to find the ring when you want to focus manually.
  
  I bought this thing as an affordable experiment: it's been a happy little surprise because it's a damn fine bit of glass. I find myself reaching for it a lot, especially for close-up work. Now, the only thing holding me back from more primes is that pesky money issue.
  
  
• Had it two days, then it FELL APART!
  By A1M1GBUTYCBMC0 on 2007-06-01
  I was excited to see the rather excellent picture quality of the lens. But after two days of very gentle shooting the lens simply fell out of its barrel. I'm not kidding. I'm very disappointed in this because I'm used to much better quality from Canon.
  Great price, great picture for the money but boy is it a piece of junk in terms of construction!
  
  
• Bang for the buck
  By A10HZJ7PA2PZJJ on 2005-07-23
  Talk about Bang for the buck. For less than the price for the standard zoom lens that Canon packages with their bodies into kits, you get a lens that has the optical quality of lenses three or four times the cost of this little 50mm f/1.8 II.
  
  IMO, this (or the 1.4) should be a required lens in every photographer's kit. Not only does it allow you to shoot in dim light indoors; but it's tiny, super light, versatile, and practically disposable (well, the 1.8, not the 1.4).
  
  On a 20D with a 1.6x FOVCF, this lens becomes something like an 85mm equivalent, making for a pretty good medium portrait lens.
  
  People who complain about prime lenses and not being able to frame a shot by a twist of their wrist need to learn how to use their feet. Sure, zoom lenses offer more versatility and the ability to change the subject to background perspective (angle), but the cost and the quality you get from prime lenses makes a prime lens like this a GREAT VALUE.
  
  With the exception of the 100mm f/ 2.8 macro, this is the only other non-L lens in my kit, and I find that I use it a lot -- especially indoors. This lens on a 20D at ISO1600 and f/2.0 allows me to hand-hold indoors at night with pretty dim light and still get a pretty decent shot. I use this lens so much I'm thinking of ditching it for the f/1.4 (to get the better glass, the 8-blade aperture, the better construction, the USM, the usable focus ring, etc).
  
  With that said, I have to say this lens is pretty good. It's not GREAT, but it's definitely worth buying, especially since you get so much for your money. From f/1.8 to about f/2.5 or so, it's kind of soft... especially at f/1.8. From f/2.5 on though, it's sharp. Not as sharp as the L-series glass, but much sharper than any of the other consumer grade lenses. The bokeh is bleh, if you ask me. Blame it on the 5-blade aperture. Somebody has a site that compares the bokeh (among other things) on the f/1.8 and the f/1.4, and it's a huge difference. You can find it pretty easily if you search for it. Also, when wide-open, the Depth Of Field is REALLY shallow. You need to anticipate it, because it's hard to tell in the tiny viewfinder.
  
  Also, it feels cheap... but who cares, it IS cheap. The motor is loud, but also who cares? It's cheap. Just don't use it when everything is supposed to be quiet. And the manual focusing ring, unless you're a hobbit, is really hard to use (it's tiny).
  
  This lens is a definite "BUY". It's hard to find another lens that's optically such a bang for the buck. It's cheap. But clean -- that's the point.
  
  
• Great lens - a must have!
  By A2Y9UQ9B5R2KVX on 2005-11-08
  I was very disappointed with my Rebel XT image quality at first (using Canon 18-55mm USM lens), a lot of OOFs, and in general very soft images. I decided to give this lens a try, WOW - sharp images, fast focus with AF motor not noisy at all. This lens is a VERY good performer in low light conditions: indoor, w/o flash. For $75 you can't go wrong. The only issue I had with the lens - hunting a little in low light, low contrast situations.
  You have to buy this lens!
  
  

• Tiffen 52mm 25 Filter (Red)
• Tiffen 52mm 11 Filter (Green)
• Tiffen 52mm 47 Filter (Blue)
• Tiffen 52mm 58 Filter (Green)
• Tiffen 52mm 80A Filter

• Tiffen 52mm UV Protection Filter
• Canon Wireless Remote Control RC1 for Digital Rebel
• Canon Deluxe Photo Backpack 200EG for Canon EOS SLR Cameras (Black with Greenish Accent)
• Canon Digital Rebel XTi 10.1MP Digital SLR Camera with EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 Lens (Black)
• Canon ES-62 Lens Hood for EF 50mm f/1.8 II (w/ hood adapter 62)